Posted
by
samzenpus
on Monday June 24, 2013 @03:40PM
from the no-sir-I-don't-like-it dept.

mask.of.sanity writes "The Australian Government has shelved its plans to proactively store communications data of every citizen ostensibly to assist with law enforcement and intelligence efforts. The shelving (video) comes after a scathing report by Australian parliamentarians who investigated the Government's plans, and three months ahead of a federal election in which the Government is expected to lose office."

"A Senate committee has slammed Australia's proposed data retention scheme, recommending it only be considered if it only collected metadata, avoided capture of browser histories and contained rigorous privacy controls and oversight."
- Basically, we want the American system and not a bit more.

Actually, based on what has been happening in Australia lately this is a huge change of course, and probably a sign that the average citizen is getting a little sick of the shenanigans pulled by the current government, (sometimes pulled by only a minister here or there, without the consensus of his own party).

As for it being basically the American system, that is not true at all, because regardless of what they say they collect, you can be sure the NSA collects your entire email, not just the headers. And the us system has no such thing as privacy controls.

Actually, based on what has been happening in Australia lately this is a huge change of course, and probably a sign that the average citizen is getting a little sick of the shenanigans pulled by the current government, (sometimes pulled by only a minister here or there, without the consensus of his own party).

This is pretty much the story with every Australia-bashing political story on/.

No doubt the minister you're eluding to is our "honourable"* Mr Conroy, his pet project internet filter has consistently failed to gain any traction in parliament over the last 6 years. Its as dead as Sam Newman's career.

* Honourable is just a title, politicians are the most dishonourable peop

sick of the shenanigans pulled by the current government, (sometimes pulled by only a minister here or there, without the consensus of his own party

Please. If you have to pass unpopular/shady/questionable policies and laws, always always set it up as one individuals doing and claim - "its not the parties policy" - they acted alone. This is standard politics, fall on your sword type devotion to the party - preserve its good name. Please dont be fooled by the massive sleight of hand (well, sleight of mouth/marketing)...

Normally I doubt the influence world public opinion has on moronic pollies, But I suspect in this instance this is actually correct. The current government has tried to get other orwellian legislation passed including internet filters so them actually being against it themselves is unlikely. I think Snowden has highlighted how unpopular such ideas are and with a government that is almost certainly getting thrown out for incompetence come september they hardly need another nail in their coffin.

If only Snowden hadn't been such a true believer in Obama, he would have released his cache before the prior election and forced the issue into the spotlight in the US. Both parties would be backpedaling furiously.

As it is, the administration (along with the opposition party) will do everything in its power to demonize him, when in fact he should be getting the Medal of Freedom. Here's hoping there is another Snowden in position to divulge the illegal spying in the run-up to the next election and perhaps some headway can be made on this issue. If not, it will all peter out in the States, and then all pretense if restrictions will be gone.

The current government has tried to get other orwellian legislation passed...

You talking about the Obama admin or another country? Becuase the current admin has been wildly successful and proactive at passing all sorts of such legislation, including the hideus Patriot Act that was created under Bush, and renewed with tongue-wagging fervor by Obama. So "tried" isn't the obvious adjective here.

They were blocked for a reason, one site contained illegal content, the rest just happened to share the same IP address. It isn't a good reason but their was certainly a reason. It is one of the problems in the world of shared hosting, you suffer the same fate as the kiddie porn site that just happens to have the same address.

I don't know about Australia, but most countries do not share the same enthusiasm for legislation by rider that the US has. Most likely Australia follows British law, where any part of a bill that is not covered by the long form title of the bill must be excluded from the act when it is passed by parliament.

No - neither the Australian legislative drafting process, nor the way legislation is debated and passed (or not) in Parliament are amenable to that kind of thing. An Act covers only a single topic (dictated by the long form of its title) and can't have US-style riders attached to it.

You don't really think that the gigantic Utah Data Center was created to store a few thousand phone conversations, do you? Nope. I suspect that the NSA is storing ALL electronic communications such as phone and email from everyone in US. It might examine only a few thousand by hand, but it is all being recorded.

It might examine only a few thousand by hand, but it is all being recorded.

Data mining isn't "examining a few thousand by hand". It's the analysis on the mass data that matters. You may drill down to specific emails/calls/transfers/etc, but to know which ones, you need to be able to map entire networks of associations.

This is not like the cameras on an ATM that stores unwatched images unless a specific event prompts someone to look at a specific time. Your personal data is not being blindly stored on these systems, unwatched since you've done nothing anyone cares about, it is being analysed along with everyone else's.

You don't really think that the gigantic Utah Data Center was created to store a few thousand phone conversations, do you? Nope. I suspect that the NSA is storing ALL electronic communications such as phone and email from everyone in US. It might examine only a few thousand by hand, but it is all being recorded.

Only an idiot thinks the US can have datacenters large enough to record every single conversation, email content and video phone conversation on a daily basis, never mind the personnel when the State and Federal Government have downsized personnel by several million positions.

When the current opposition party was Government they took Australia into Vietnam and Iraq and copied the 'war on terror' mantra. While no Australian politician can be anti-American, the current opposition party are arse-lickers of American politicians.

"The Australian Attorney-General Department's pig-headed push for Internet data retention were rejected by an Intelligence Oversight Committee for being vague and violating civil liberties. Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said the government needs to get the message and drop the scheme, and warned data retention could be used by PRISM. Head Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus says data retention is off the agenda for now, though when the last AG made a similar promise they caught everyone off guard and passed new laws 12 days later"

The worst thing about all this stuff is, they say they reject the data retention law now, but, no one has questioned what the government will be doing with the planned centralised "National Broadband Network", owned and run by the government.

They won't need data retention laws for ISP's nor companies such as google, the government owned infrastructure will be the isthemus of all digital communications in Australia. I just don't believe for a second that some sort of all-encompassing surveillance program isn

The fix to which is to encrypt all communications from the home / office to the rest of the world.

The first thing ISP's could do is stop supporting insecure communication channels to/from their customers. There is no reason to not use STARTTLS with submission. There is no reason to continue to support POP/IMAP without SSL/TLS.

Next they should use DANE to publish their CERTs to ensure that active MitM attacks are not possible.

I call on all ISP's to disable unencrypted mail submission / retrieval with their

Squidlips did not use any modality in his statement that "Voters are idiots". Furthermore saying a form of logic was discovered is like saying someone has discovered a new number. They are constructs. Models made by human cognizance to describe what perceptibly does or does not exist (sometimes both and neither). Perhaps you should have paid more attention when studying such things.

Yep, it's rare for people to actually have to pay the fine, however we consistently get 90+% of voters turning up to a state/federal election which is a GoodThing(TM).

Not necessarily, how many donkey's are we getting per election.

Polly's viciously contest the coveted top spot on the ballot as a lot of people just go 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. I encourage highly apathetic people to start on the 2nd, 3rd or 4th box when they do this to try and introduce some randomness into this system. Fortunately the order on most ballot papers in Oz are randomly selected.

Aussies in general are reluctant to get involved in their own governance. I get a lot of people complaining about speed zon

Aussies in general are reluctant to get involved in their own governance.

This is what is going to cause Australia to follow the rest of the world into economic, social and environmental disaster. Many people (Australians) I speak to feel that we need to change the government, but when you ask them why they have little to no idea what the government actually does or how it works. The government we have now has not done a great job, but they have done extremely well considering the global issues going on - but many Australians tend to care nothing about the rest of the world unless it's broadcast in prime time in a sitcom format.

Aussies in general are reluctant to get involved in their own governance.

This is what is going to cause Australia to follow the rest of the world into economic, social and environmental disaster. Many people (Australians) I speak to feel that we need to change the government, but when you ask them why they have little to no idea what the government actually does or how it works. The government we have now has not done a great job, but they have done extremely well considering the global issues going on - but many Australians tend to care nothing about the rest of the world unless it's broadcast in prime time in a sitcom format.

This,

The Labor government hasn't done a terribly good job, but it was passable. However the Murdoch run press wants to paint it as the end of the world.

Really, I view the Murdoch press as a greater threat to Australia than all the politicians put together... Murdoch ultimately does not have to answer to the constituents.

I agree with you regarding public infrastructure. You can't increase functional efficiency (that is, the pipes and wires) on a natural monopoly easily without providing an inferior service (i.e. reduced maintenance).

I think your second paragraph is kind of a given. Your first paragraph is actually only ideally true anyway... i'm sure you've seen examples of corporations dictating the status quo, and sometimes that does extend to legal matters.

Polly's viciously contest the coveted top spot on the ballot... Fortunately the order on most ballot papers in Oz are randomly selected.

Correct [aec.gov.au] Our "representatives" don't actually get a say in their ballot position.

Aussies in general are reluctant to get involved in their own governance.

Historically yes, particularly when compared to how politically active citizens are in other countries. In some European & South American countries, you KNOW when an election is around the corner; mass rallies, demonstrations, strikes, etc.

However I believe this is very gradually changing in Australia, in part due to technology. For example just as negative Twitter comments sometimes force large companies to actually sit-up

Yet you still wind up with a government that's competing with the UK and USA for the Police State Award.

Do we?!

I mean the inept Australian government actually felt it necessary to go to parliament to get legislative power to do what the UK and USA Police states just went ahead and did.

In Australia we were displeased because we were informed about the government's intentions. The US and UK governments did not see fit similarly to displease their respective constituents. The Australian government has backed down in the face of both public and parliamentary opposition to the plan. Do you seriously believe the US or the UK are about dismantle their machinery? For all the articles the Guardian may publish?

Of course, Australia is likely to change government in September, and then we will have the government for which dealing with constituents will be a much lower priority - right after changing the filter in the coffee machine.

By definition a constituent is a voter; but I agree the perception from the likely future government of what a constituent is is very different to the dictionary definition.

Selling government owned assets is fantastic. You make a heap of money, get to ensure that all future profits go to those who had enough money and warning to buy up the asset (either in total or shares) and in 10 years time when the profit from the sale is gone and you no longer have the profit from the asset, you aren't in power any mor

On security and data retention, Senator Scott Ludlam of the greens is asking the right questions in the right places, though.

I agree. While the Greens hearts often seem (to those of us thus inclined) to be in the right place, I fear their the quality of their parliamentarians is often wanting. Ludlam, however not only has his heart in place, he is right across his portfolio (not only as it regards security and data rentention). His knowledge and understanding is at least the equal of the minister- and s

Turns out it was both unfeasible (i mean, it was obvious even to people who weren't going to have to implement it) to monitor everything and not everyone here is a complete idiot. Lucky for us, i guess.

I got fined once for failing to vote in a local council election, it was $10 back then. I tossed the fine in the bin, I mean a council election, pull the other one. That was close to a quarter of a century ago... I'm still waiting for them to get back to me so I can mount my brilliant legal argument about local govt. not having any constitutional standing.

So now they are going have this referendum to give local govt constitutional standin

I work as an election official on election day. Posting as an AC to protect anonymity.

Legally, you are incorrect. Under the Electoral Act, it is your duty to vote, and an offence not to. Practically, of course, you are correct. Because voting is secret, nobody can tell if you voted... unless you admit it on Slashdot.

What I wanted to say is that I have one request, and one request only, on behalf of election officials everywhere: Please take the ballot papers that have been issued to you and put them in the ballot box. Fill them out or don't. Write a slogan on them. I don't care, do anything you want... just put them into the ballot box in one piece.

There have been some very close elections around the world recently, including Australia. What makes Australia different is that there has been no question of electoral fraud.

We don't often stop to consider just how remarkable this is. Look at the mess of the 2000 presidential elections in the US, or the previous elections resulting in a hung parliament in the UK, or Italy (just Italy; I don't think I need to expand on that). We may not know how to run a country, but we know how to run an election. We do it bloody well, and this is something you can be proud of.

One of the tenets of security is that you analyse known threats and look for patterns, and one of the mechanisms that is commonly used to rig elections around the world is to selectively remove ballot papers from being considered in the count. There are various methods to do this, from stealing and destroying them, to changing the rules of formality post facto (hanging chads, anyone?).

It's an unbelievably huge deal if ballot papers go missing. Removing ballot papers from the polling centre does not send any message to your politicians, nor does it help change the system. All it does is causes a major headache for already-exhausted casual employees. (Don't forget, we've been at the polling centre since an hour before it opened, and have to stay there until counting finishes. It's a very long day.)

Whatever you think about compulsory voting, or the state of the political system and the major parties, it is not the fault of the Australian Electoral Commission or their casual staff. So... yeah, please put the damn papers in the damn box.

For the few decades that NSW and Tasmania especially (Victoria had an early penal settlement, but only really took off with the free settlers under John Batman) took the convicts the Americas could no longer accommodate (due to that pesky revolution), there was no universal suffrage. Voting, such as it was being restricted to men of property. By 1858 when the only property requirement in NSW became a penis, it has been a d

Parent AC didn't mean "...because of this"; the current government is pulling record low numbers in the polls. They are hated and are going to be destroyed in the next election.

And it sucks, because the leader of the next government is a US-style neo-conservative religious nutter. And his party is dominated by True Believers in US-style trickle-down economics. The current government's incompetence is going to allow something much worse to take over, not only to control the lower House (and hence the executive) but likely the Senate, giving them basically a rubber stamp on anything they want to shove through.

The only reason he isn't a "US-style religious nutter" is he doesn't have the charisma or personality to carry it off. He wants to be. Look at the speeches he manages to get out without tripping over his own tongue and he is very much striving to be this. I can't imagine how bad things will get when this ideology, combined with his frequent confusion when taken off-script or dealing with foreign governments, gets into power. Ask me again in 12 months and I am afraid we will all have an answer.

Abbott is what Santorum (who comes from the same Catholic faction) would look like if he had to run in a country like Australia.

However, I meant "US-style neo-con" and "religious nutter". Not "US-style religious nutter". For the latter, you need Steve Fielding's party.

[Hey, secular Americans, our ultraconservative evangelical movement had to create a third party, which got about 2% in the last election. (7% in even the most conservative state.) Livin' the dream baby.]

The current government's incompetence is going to allow something much worse to take over

No, the incompetence of the Australian voter will be responsible for that. However numerous polls also show that the majority of voters would have preferred to be choosing from Rudd vs Turner. Turner leads the traditional side of conservative politics, the side that still has some principles and common respect for their ideological opponents.

The fundamental problem in Oz is that the mining unions are pulling the strings in the Labor party and the mine owners are pulling the strings in the Liberal party, and Murdoch controls 70% of the press. On many subjects the union and the bosses are in lockstep agreement, eg: the unionists ousted Rudd because of his mining tax plans, their bosses ousted Turner because of his plans to regulate carbon emissions. Neither the union leaders or mine owners want anything to get in the way of digging holes in the ground, everybody seems to have forgotten about Tony's prediction of economic Armageddon, the carbon tax was instituted a year ago and we are still one of the healthiest economies on the planet.

Disclaimer: I believe we should exploit our resources but not at the cost of our natural life support systems, for instance coal mines on cape york are potentially a threat to the great barrier reef. The reef is not only a valuable tourist attraction it is also a massive fish nursery, The shelf waters around Australia's coast are the breeding ground for much of the southern hemisphere's fisheries, the planetary food web is not something you can put a price on, it's essential natural infrastructure that (if given a chance) is so productive it allows some of us enough time to do things like dig massive holes and sell magic rocks to China.

I see it another way. I see it more that we have 2 choices and they're fundamentally the same thing. It's not about Gillard and Abbott (they're figure heads, we don't have a president here, the "leader" is a mouthpiece, not a policy maker - policies are made behind closed doors and then communicated via these mouthpieces).

So I couldn't care less who the leader of either party is. When it comes to policies, though, they're both much the same thing. Both parties are so close to each other that the only real

I agree the country won't change too much, but the quality of life for the average Australian will. Look at what is happening in Queensland and Victoria; leasing of National Parks, decimation of the Public Service directly impacting services (wait times at a lot of public services is up over 200%), corporations given exclusions to local planning regulations...All of these sort of things make a regular impact on the day to day life of people living at or below the median wage.

Yeah I'm not sold. I recon the govt will change in September and life won't be any better or worse than it would have been under the existing one (of course, this can never be verified).

We basically have a cyclic 2 party system in Australia and although it's ludicrously inefficient, it basically works. We actually need to change the government every decade or so. We need Labour to spend money on big infrastructure and we need Liberal to earn the money to spend - a spend and save cycle. If we had one or the

I despise people who say "They're both the same". The only time they are the same is when people are watching, when parliament is divided. As soon as people stop watching, you see their true colours. (Such as when Howard's government got control of both houses. And the same thing will happen with Abbott after the next election.)

That's not how the polls are shaping up. Greens have lost votes. The swing against Labor is going directly to the Liberal primary vote. I suspect the Greens and the current independents will lose their lower house seats.

And it sucks, because the leader of the next government is a US-style neo-conservative religious nutter. And his party is dominated by True Believers in US-style trickle-down economics.

I've been watching Tony's political career for longer than most (he buttonholed me outside the Fisher Library in 1978 I think it was). He was a certifiable nutter then* and many of my cohort of students from that degree have been living in fear these past 35 years that one day we would be facing the prospect of his leading an Australian government. [*To be to fair to Mr Abbott in the '70s, he was in this more than outbalanced by members of the "loony Left." We tend to forget that the rejection of material reality which now forms the central plank of the neo-con/Tea Party ideology, was once the province of the more radical sects of the Left. For instance the ideologically motivated denial of Climate Science is an echo of the denial of Plate Tectonics which was at one time held to be inconsistent with Marxist dialectical-materialism! A position which would no doubt have perplexed even Dr Marx.]

However, it appears to me that, like most of us, Tony has mellowed with age. I find his opportunistic "blood pledge" to repeal a market based solution for addressing carbon usage with an ironically more "socialist" orientated Direct Action approach to be highly reprehensible (and one hopes unsuccessful). Similarly, once in government, one hopes they will recognise the folly of their ways in regard to the NBN rollout. In general, however, I don't think we should be overly concerned about the radicalism of his current political position. His adherence to "trickle-down economics," for example, is I think is vastly overstated, my feeling is that his personal economic position has developed from the kind of Catholic corporatism preached by his mentor B.A. Santamaria. But here too he has become less ideological. Moreover his views in regard to the academy (and pure research) are far more enlightened than anything we've witnessed in Australia's recent anti-intellectual history. To the point that some of use working in the sector (traditionally part of the natural constituency of the centre left) dare to hope for some small moves to correct the wrecking of Australia's university system which began with the Dawkins "Reforms."

However, not only has Tony's ideology been mollified by age, his ambition too has overtaken his principles. Remember this is the guy who, we are to believe, when bargaining for government at the start of this hung parliament, told an independent either that he would "sell his arse," or do "anything but sell his arse," to become P.M.

It's not what Tony believes that you need to worry about. It is the editorial policy of the company which publishes the Daily Telegraph and the Herald Sun is that will once again determine the policy direction of the country. Witness now what happens to any government that dares not tow the line! Abbott's ambition will preclude him from making the same mistake.

The current government's incompetence...

A case in point. While this has perhaps not been the most stellar government in Australia's history, the fact that even you have been sold the idea of the government's supposed "incompetence" is a the real concern. True, there have been political mistakes made. Most recently Ms Gillard's raising of the "abortion" issue. An crude attack on Mr Abbott's catholic faith, and an issue on which Tony, his ambition taking the driver's seat, has taken a leaf out of Pilate's book. Made all the more inept by the fact that the coded term "reproductive rights" would have satisfied the present audience just as well. Or allowing the Carbon "Tax" (which is actually a trading scheme with only a temporary lead-in tax like structure) to be known as a TAX (booword!).

However, putting aside emotive public discourse for a moment... any dispassionate assessment of the current gover

Not to disagree with most of your points, but managing a hostile media is exactly the skill that is needed by any government.

As a contrasting example, the Libs did not fight criticism from the ABC by coddling them. They viciously attacked and undermined their reputation. They actively complained about every story on the ABC networks (TV/Radio) that didn't support their spin, as if it was wildly biased. They spun the idea of the "unfair, far left, biased" ABC as if it were a scientific fact. They did the sam

The only reason they were able to publicly attack the ABC was because they had almost every other media outlet bending over backwards to help them. The LNP have already stated their plans to privatize the ABC, which will almost certainly bundle it with the existing media. After which, the government not supported by the owners of big media will not be able to get their message out at all. How do you distribute a dissenting attitude when the media is refusing to report truth?

Not to disagree with most of your points, but managing a hostile media is exactly the skill that is needed by any government.

I do not completely disagree with you. I've often bemoaned the poor work of the current Labor propaganda department. They took a straight talker like Julia and made her sprout goobledygook like her predecessor, promised us the "Real Julia" and gave us more goobledygook. The approach to embedding advertising-like catch phrases into speeches exposes speakers to ridicule, especially

I wondered if I'd missed a meeting or two, until you said we gaol people for not voting. it's a small fine which would expire with the statute of limitations before SPAR would try to incarcerate you for it.

Not voting means REFUSING to support the (current) system. In Australia, you are forced by law to support the system, forced by law to answer intimate questions about your sex life (if 'randomly' chosen by the bureau of statistics). Any forum where outraged citizens dare to express objections are overwhelm by Stasi Australians trained to scream "shut your mouth and do as you are told". We call this COMPLIANCY TRAINING. We see similar situations happening to the members of the more 'culty' churches in the USA.

Not voting means you get sent a letter, to which you can reply with an excuse as to why you didn't vote. I have replied with, "I had to wash my dog". Sadly I wasn't imprisoned or fined, I could have done with a clean room and warm bed.

The current government and it's immediate predecessor (of the same party) has done a brilliant job. Compare to the rest of the world. The wanna-be's keep making statements contrary to the facts, but Rupert Murdoch and Gina Rinehart want a change, and with control of most of the media consistently push outright lies. Their media has, for example, reported the current Prime Minister would be dumped by their party EVERY WEEK for the past 130 weeks. Ain't happened yet - it is a bare-faced attempt at destabilisation.Australia's Liberal (i.e conservative) Party - the finest politicians money can buy.

This. So many times this.

The crux of it is multiple fold:1) Rupert Murdoch owns the biggest cable network in Australia (Foxtel). The current governments NBN plan will give up to 100Mbit (maybe even 1GBit) to just about every home in a town above 1000 homes - Australia wide. As the US has seen with streaming services, in this environment, cable tv would be obliterated. Its just a sad fact that the same guy owns most of the media - therefore he uses his influence to protect his media assets.

Very well summed up. I wish Australia would see these comments, and even if they didn't take them at face value, at least think about them. At no point in history do I remember being exposed to such a massive fraud being perpetuated on the public by the media elite. I saw Tony Abbott speak once and he was a complete disaster, couldn't string two sentences together clearly, unable to answer questions that weren't phrased to permit a bottled answer, unwilling to look at or even recognize the existence of peop